Ride history

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The readOnlyHint=true annotation already establishes this is a safe read, so the description only needs to add context. "Newest first" is a useful ordering disclosure, but nothing is said about pagination, the default cap of 10 results, or whether only completed rides appear.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler and the ordering constraint surfaced immediately. It is efficient, though its brevity shades into under-specification for a tool with an undocumented parameter.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema and only one parameter, which lowers the bar, and the annotations cover the safety profile. Still, an agent cannot tell from this definition how many rides come back by default or how this differs from list_scheduled_rides.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% for the single `limit` parameter, so the description carries the burden and mentions nothing about it — no default, no maximum of 50, no note that omitting it returns 10. The schema keywords convey the bounds but not the meaning of the cap.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource ("Lists ... rides") plus an ordering guarantee ("newest first"), so the agent knows exactly what the tool returns. It does not, however, distinguish it from the close sibling list_scheduled_rides, which is a plausible source of mis-selection.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

"Recent rides" weakly implies past/historical rides rather than scheduled ones, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no exclusions, and no mention of list_scheduled_rides or get_ride_status as alternatives. The agent must infer routing from the tool name alone.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.